Share this

If a sitting judge could be a columnist, the New York Times should sign up Federal Judge Michael McConnell who was on Bush's short list to be Chief Justice. I have never had a conversation with him that failed to challenge my assumptions and enrich my thinking. Second choice -- a libertarian conservative, like Roger Pilon or attorney Eric Jaffe. Finally, I wish they would abandon the "conservative slot" notion and try out the four best thinkers I know for three months each; Robert G. Kaiser of the Washington Post, Alan Brinkley, Provost of Columbia (both friends from whom I always learn), Michael Kinsley and Andrew Sullivan. And, of course, Dahlia Lithwick. (Do I get a better posting postion if I add Fred Barbash?)

Glenn Reynolds asks whether Joshua Treviño, my friend (and RedState co-founder!), is "establishment enough" to be the conservative editorial columnist--or one of them, anyway--at the New York Times. May I offer my sincere and profound hope that Josh is selected precisely because he is not an establishment figure?

I suppose that if the New York Times's was in good financial shape thanks to all of the establishment positions it has embraced, it would serve as an argument for further establishment thinking when it comes to selecting the next conservative columnist. But of course, the New York Timesis not in good financial shape. As such, establishment thinking is not and should not be the order of the day. Quite the contrary; the New York Times should shake things up rather dramatically so that perhaps, just perhaps, it can pick itself up off the mat and become a consequential news organization again.

Josh can help them do that. He is iconoclastic in his writing but in the best way possible, having carved out a niche all his own and having won the respect of his readers in the process. He is firm in his convictions and equally firm when he believes that it is necessary to call out his own side of the philosophical divide. He has a wonderful and eloquent way with words. And he won't pussyfoot on the issues of the day.

The New York Times has nothing to lose in picking him. They have everything to gain. It would be a bold, unsettling, momentous choice to give Joshua Treviño the conservative slot for the Times's editorial page. And quite frankly, the Times needs to be bold and unsettling if it wants to re-establish itself as the newspaper of record once again.

The Republicans should certainly vote against the stimulus bill and it is good to see that the House Republicans have done so. The problems with the stimulus bill, as crafted are manifold--I have sought to detail them here and here, among other places--and implementing the stimulus would be a waste of time and resources. Keynesian stimulus has traditionally failed so the design is fundamentally flawed.

Regarding the current stimulus package, we will not even be able to spend enough of the appropriated funds quickly enough to make any kind of difference to the economy. There is no point in engaging in this futile exercise and if a stimulus package does indeed get passed, it should be owned completely and entirely by the Democrats.

Speaking of the Congressional Branch of Our Overlord Political Class, their pretensions to bipartisanship are easily revealed as false by the manner in which they have excluded Republicans from the political process in the House of Representatives. Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic leadership have run a very insular operation and have sought to ensure that Republicans play as little a role as possible in crafting a stimulus package. Despite their complaints for the past eight years, the Speaker and her allies in Congress have made clear that they deserve to be the object of the very calumnies they have launched at George W. Bush for allegedly being divisive, partisan and polarizing. One hopes that it dawns on the Democratic leadership that their actions over the past eight years have amounted to the pot calling the kettle black. One hopes as well that the voters will notice in time for the 2010 midterm elections.

Edward Stroligo (guest)
Writer , NY:

Hmmm. Americans spend beyond their means for years. So when they decide to get fiscally prudent for once, the government becomes the designated fiscal fool? Our economy got revved up too high on borrowed money spent on consumption; for the long run, it needs to scale back. Outside of some ameliorative actions to help those most hurt by hard times, a government bender won't end the financial hangover, it will just postpone an even bigger one for a later date. The GOP is not wrong in opposing this, and won't be hurt in the long run for opposing this.
Per the New York Times, how about Rich Lowry? He edits a conservative magazine, just like Kristol, and he's already a syndicated columnist, maybe the Times can save some money using his column. :)

cathy seligman (guest)
retired , AK:

who should replace kristol?
newt gingrich, if he would do it. lively discussion, no shortage of ideas.

Jeff Roberson (guest)
Dad , OH:

The GOP needs to step up and get to business. Red herrings like condoms and half-baked CBO reports are fooling no one.

Linda Conley (guest)
Homemaker/Reader , OR:

I would ask Mr Biespiel of the Arena to consider the facts surrounding just why, precisely, the electorate voted the Democrats in in huge numbers this past November. It was not, to my way of thinking, in any way a repudiation of conservative principles; rather, it was a repudiation of how the so-called, should-have-been, fiscal conservatives operated in Congress these past eight years.

By and large, it is the consensus among my ilk that Bush was no fiscal conservativc, nor I should add, should the entire problems plaguing our economy be laid at his door. Still, had he and other Republicans in Congress acted fiscally responsible, I dare say, this economic mess we are presently saddled with would be far less of a painful reality for the folks across this great country of ours. Recall, please, that days before the plummeting of the stock-market in October '08, McCain and his friend, Sarah Palin, enjoyed a rather comfortable lead. Thereafter, folks grew entirely despondent as day after day the market fell and people lost their monies. Many, of course, had only themselves to blame for their own personal fiscal responsibility, along with several key Democratic figures in Congress. Then, and only then, did Obama assume a comfortable lead with the electorate. Fear rules, my friend. So be very careful how you read this situation, esp. when you and your fellow Democrats say, ah ha, this repudiates conservative ideology. I believe, like most of my fellow Republicans, that this is in fact a center-right country and Obama presently looks to be leading us down the been-there, done-this Big Government path. People would love nothing better than to see again, the gloriously golden Reagan years that followed the spendthrift Carter years and his Democrat-controlled Congress. It was no accident that left-leaning liberals failed to rule this country for decades afterwards. The question remains: will the people here, encumbered with their sense of economic malaise as presently they most decidedly are, feel comfortable, of a sudden, allowing Mr Daddy in the Government to take care of them, to decide what is best for them, as so many folks in Europe have? You know, a little More contraception is just the ticket for you ma'am, and for you, sir. It ain't for me, babe, no way this Big Government. I urge my Republican Congressional Brethren: vote a resounding NO! on this wasteful, Democratic stocking-filler proposal!!!!!

William McEnery (guest)
IT Analyst , RI:

Rush limbaugh should write for the Times. The House Reps should not vote for the stimulus because Rush Limbaugh told them not to. Who am I kidding, who cares except Rush Limbaugh what the House Reps do?

Dan Macmillan (guest)
Builder , MA:

I agree with the Republicans that this bill, as currently structured, needs to be voted down. What we should do is: Lower the tax rate for the wealthiest Americans, which will obviously result in jobs, jobs, jobs as recent history has proven. We should lower the tax rate for small businesses( define by number of employees what a small business is?) so they can create jobs, jobs, jobs as we have seen how effective this approach is over the last eight years. What about drilling? For three months all I heard was drill baby drill, now with Rush leading the way, all I'm hearing is burn baby burn. The Republicans and their philosophies have bankrupt this nation and it's people to the point that we borrow money from Communists, Socialists, and dictatorships to give tax cuts to capitalists. This bill should be voted down until it explicitly excludes tax cuts and includes tax hikes on the wealthiest Americans. The Republicans should vote their conscience, and the Democrats should cram this bill so far down their throat they have no choice but to digest it.

Stefan Saal (guest)
sculptor , NH:

The US government faces huge, potentially debilitating structural deficits as far as the eye can see. In the short term, due to a cyclical downturn, the US government must provide deficit-financed public spending to insolvent local governments and the unemployed. In the medium term, the US government needs to promote a more productive society by increasing investments in energy, healthcare, and education. To improve its balance sheet and pay for all this, the US government needs to cut wasteful spending, and increase revenues through taxation. Haphazard spending and further tax cuts now will ruin our chances for long-term improvement.

Stefan Saal (guest)
sculptor , NH:

Replace Kristol with Luttwak. He's hardworking, trenchant, and a good troublemaker...

The GOP would be smart to vote with the stimulus bill because of the public support it enjoys. As the next few weeks progress and larger job losses build looking like you want the stimulus to fail wont look good. Americans have already shown that they don't trust the GOP with economic issues so attaching to the stimulus is a win /win. It also prevents the apparent hippocracy that you see coming from the GOP with them being "concerned" for the price of things now... when it didn't really matter how much debt we had for the last 8 years.
In review vote for the bill, if it fails then you can go back to being the "money concious" party.

Linda Conley (guest)
Homemaker/Reader , OR:

Mark Steyn for the new NY Times columnist: a disarmingly charming man, a terribly clever fellow suffusing the page with his inimitable quick-fire witticisms. With Steyn as a columnist, the still-angry liberals responding each week to absolutely ANYTHING Kristol put forth, might be forced to, well, reflect a moment before firing off their ennui-inducing vitriol. A truly unique man, this guy. Second choice: James Bowman, who currently writes for The New Criterion, an astute man known for writing of the news media, the strain of anti-Americanism thereof, "prominent among which of course," he writes in New Criterion January 2009, "is the New York Times itself." Oh, how brave will the editors at the Times be, if at all, this time around?

Luke Maffei (guest)
Communications Consultant , CA:

The Times should provide something really worth reading and just have Maureen Dowd write Kristol's column as Kill Bristol (easy Palin-ites...calm down). Maureen is at her best when she is making stuff up (not an insult...I think she has a real narrative talent, and she's proven that she cold have written West Wing like the pros) and frankly we don't need one more "reasoned conservative" crooning about the loss of Reagan and the still-alive status of Carter.

Gary Sieburg (guest)
Financial Advisor , TX:

Republicans should go line by line with this bill and prove that Democrats are trying to slip in all kinds of socialist and liberal spending for the purpose of furthering their liberal agenda. At the same time they are fear mongering and talking down the already vulnerabel economy, while calling this a stimulus. The American people need to finally wake up and see how the democrats are trying to scam the public. At the same time they are trying to scare Republicans into voting for this flawed package. Republicans should not vote for this bill until all of the socialist and liberal "cockroaches" have been outed.

Jeffrey Minch (guest)
President, CEO public company , TX:

This morning I read the Bill --- 647 pages, double spaced, line numbered and pretty easy reading but long, long, long. This is the greatest boondobble in the history of our country. The sheer magnitude of it is staggering --- we are spending 7% of GDP in a single Bill. Can you imagine how much money that really is?
It hands out money to every government program imaginable in billion dollar, hundreds of millions of dollar chunks like blowing out birthday cake candles with an atom bomb. It is incomprehsible to imagine who wrote this Bill and how they could possibly have spent a single second contemplating the investment of each million dollars. It is literally like trying to fill a thimble with a fire hose.
This Bill is simply tantamount to taking a 50 pound sack of dog food and giving it to an Airedale puppy and telling the puppy: "Now, pace yourself and eat slowly so you don't get sick."
This Bill funds every social program ever created with a lack of precision that is unimaginable. This is a disaster of enormous proportions and is indicative that the Obama administration and the US Congress (apparently the Democrats at least) are in a total, complete panic. This is the Tulip Frenzy!
President Cool, I don't think so!

Daniel Dickter (guest)
MAT student , PA:

What's wrong with Michelle Malkin to replace Kristol at the "Paper of Record"?
She has a popular blog and is a sometimes guest on the TV talking head shows.
How about Laura Ingraham? She's got a popular radio show and is a published author.
I think both of these women are young, dynamic, and marketable. If the Times wants to increase their readership and stop the bleeding, they should really pick a person that will get new people wanting to read their paper.

More POLITICO Arena

About the Arena

The Arena is a cross-party, cross-discipline forum for intelligent and lively conversation about political and policy issues. Contributors have been selected by POLITICO staff and editors. David Mark, Arena's moderator, is a Senior Editor at POLITICO. Each morning, POLITICO sends a question based on that day's news to all contributors.